Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiSoft Crimes Against Democracy
What Ever Happened to Freedom of Information?
Disgraceful, shameful, illegal, and yes, dangerous. These are words that come to mind every time the Bush administration makes yet another attempt to consolidate executive power, while wrapping itself in secrecy and deception.
And its officials never stop. In May, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonprofit group, filed a lawsuit seeking information from the White House Office of Administration about an estimated five million e-mail messages that mysteriously vanished from White House computer servers between March 2003 and October 2005. Congress wants to investigate whether these messages contain evidence about the firing of nine United States attorneys who may have refused to use their positions to help Republican candidates or harm Democratic ones.
The administration's first response to yet another scandal was to scrub the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request section from the White House Office website. One day it was there; the next day it had disappeared. Then, Bush-appointed lawyers from the Justice Department tried to convince a federal judge that the White House Office of Administration was not subject to scrutiny by the Freedom of Information Act because it wasn't an "agency." The newly labeled non-agency, in fact, had its own FOIA officer and had responded to 65 FOIA requests during the previous 12 months. Its own website had listed it as subject to FOIA requests.
For those who may have forgotten, Congress passed the Freedom of Information Act in 1966 to hold government officials and agencies accountable to public scrutiny. It became our national sunshine law and has allowed us to know something of what our elected officials actually do, rather than what they say they do. Congress expressly excluded classified information from FOIA requests in order to protect national security.
Scorning accountability, the Bush administration quickly figured out how to circumvent the Act. On October 12, 2001, just one month after the 9/11 attacks, Attorney General John Ashcroft took advantage of a traumatized nation to ensure that responses to FOIA requests would be glacially slowed down, if the requests were not simply rejected outright.
Most Americans were unaware of what happened -- and probably still are. If so, I'd like to remind you how quickly democratic transparency vanished after 9/11 and why this most recent contorted rejection of our premier sunshine law is more than a passing matter; why it is, in fact, an essential aspect of this administration's continuing violation of our civil rights and liberties, the checks and balances of our system of government, and, yes, even our Constitution.
On Bended Knee
Lies and deception intended to expand executive power weren't hard to spot after 9/11, yet they tended to slip beneath the political and media radar screens; nor did you have to be an insider with special access to government officials or classified documents to know what was going on. At the time, I was an editorial writer and columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle. From my little cubicle at the paper, I read a memorandum sent by Attorney General John Ashcroft to all federal agencies. Short and to the point, it basically gave them permission to resist FOIA requests and assured them that the Justice Department would back up their refusals. "When you carefully consider FOIA requests," Ashcroft wrote, "and decide to withhold records, in whole or in part, you can be assured that the Department of Justice will defend your decision unless they lack a sound legal basis or present an unwarranted risk of adverse impact on the ability of other agencies to protect other important records."
He then went on to explain, "Any discretionary decision by your agency to disclose information protected under FOIA should be made only after full and deliberate consideration of the institutional, commercial, and personal privacy interests that could be implicated by disclosure of the information."
And what, I wondered, did such constraints and lack of accountability have to do with finding and prosecuting terrorists? Why the new restrictions? Angered, I wrote an editorial for the Chronicle about the Justice Department's across-the-board attempt to censor freedom of information. ("All of us want to protect our nation from further acts of terrorism. But we must never allow the public's right to know, enshrined in the Freedom of Information Act, to be suppressed for the sake of official convenience.")
Naively and impatiently, I waited for other newspapers to react to such a flagrant attempt to make the administration unaccountable to the public. Not much happened. A handful of media outlets noted Ashcroft's memorandum, but where, I wondered, were the major national newspapers? The answer was: on bended knee, working as stenographers, instead of asking the tough questions. Ashcroft had correctly assessed the historical moment. With the administration launching its Global War on Terror, and the country still reeling from the September 11th attacks, he was able to order agencies to start building a wall of secrecy around the government.
In the wake of 9/11, both pundits and the press seemed to forget that, ever since 1966, the Freedom of Information Act had helped expose all kinds of official acts of skullduggery, many of which violated our laws. They also seemed to forget that all classified documents were already protected from FOIA requests and unavailable to the public. In other words, most agencies had no reason to reject public FOIA requests.
A few people, however, were paying attention. In February 2002, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) asked the General Accounting Office (GAO) to evaluate the "implementation of the FOIA." Ashcroft's new rules had reversed former Attorney General Janet Reno's policy, in effect since 1993. "The prior policy," Leahy reminded the GAO, "favored openness in government operation and encouraged a presumption of disclosure of agency records in response to FOIA requests unless the agency reasonably foresaw that disclosure would be harmful to an interest protected by a specific exemption."
And what was the impact of Ashcroft's little-noticed memorandum? Just what you'd expect from a presidency built on secrecy and deception -- given a media then largely ignoring both. The Attorney General's new policy was a success. On August 8, 2007, the Coalition of Journalists for Open Government issued "Still Waiting After All These Years," a damning report that documented the Ashcroft memorandum's impact on FOIA responses. Their analysis revealed that "the number of FOIA requests processed has fallen 20%, the number of FOIA personnel is down 10%, the backlog has tripled and the cost of handling a request is up 79%." During the same years, the Bush administration embarked on a major effort to label ever more government documents classified. They even worked at reclassifying documents that had long before been made public, ensuring that ever less information would be available through FOIA requests. And what material they did send out was often so heavily redacted as to be meaningless.
"Soft Crimes" Enable Violent Ones
Six years after Ashcroft instituted his policy, some of our legislators have finally begun to address what he accomplished in 2001. In April, 2007, the House of Representatives passed legislation to strengthen and expedite the Freedom of Information Act. On August 3, Senators Pat Leahy, once again chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and John Cornyn (R-TX) successfully shepherded the Open Government Act into law, despite strong opposition from administration outrider Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), who had earlier placed a hold on the bill. Like the House bill, the legislation attempted to make it easier to gain access to government documents.
Will it make a difference? Probably not. The Coalition of Journalists for Open Government views the legislation as too weak and compromised to be effective against such an administration. Steven Aftergood, Director of the Project on Government Secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists notes that the administration might well succeed in claiming that the White House Office of Administration is not an "agency." "It's obnoxious, and it's a gesture of defiance against the norms of open government," Aftergood told the Washington Post. "But it turns out that a White House body can be an agency one day and cease to be the next day, as absurd as it may seem."
It's not only absurd; it's dangerous. This is an administration that believes it has complete authority to ignore the law every time it mentions the supposedly inherent powers of a commander-in-chief presidency or wields the words "executive privilege." Its non-agency claim is but one more example of its arrogant defiance of laws passed by Congress.
Ashcroft's quashing of the FOIA, following on the heels of the Patriot Act, was just the beginning of a long series of efforts to expand executive power. In the name of fighting "the war on terror" and "national security," for instance, Bush issued an executive order on November 1, 2001 that sealed presidential records indefinitely, a clear violation of the 1978 Presidential Records Act in which Congress had ensured the public's right to view presidential records 12 years after a president leaves office.
And what did this have to do with preventing a potential terrorist attack? Absolutely nothing, of course. It just so happened that 12 years had passed since Ronald Reagan left the Oval Office. Many people believed, as I did, that locking down Reagan's papers was an effort to stop journalists and historians from reading documents that might have implicated Papa Bush (then Reagan's vice president) and others -- who, by then, were staffing the younger Bush's administration -- as active participants in the Iran-Contra scandal.
When the White House claimed that its administrative office was not subject to the FOIA, an August 24th editorial in the New York Times -- now more alert to Bush's disregard for the rule of law -- asked, "What exactly does the administration want to hide?" It rightly argued that the "administration's refusal to comply with open-government laws is ultimately more important than any single scandal. The Freedom of Information Act and other right-to-know laws were passed because government transparency is vital to a democracy."
How true. It's taken a long time for our paper of record to realize that "soft" crimes are actually hard assaults against our democracy. The restrictions on FOIA and an executive order to seal presidential records may seem tame when compared to the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib, Haditha, and Guantanamo, not to mention warrantless surveillance, the extraordinary rendition of kidnapped terror suspects to the prisons of regimes that torture, and the imprisonment of so-called enemy combatants.
But don't be lulled into thinking that the act of censoring information, of shielding the American people from knowledge of the most basic workings of their own government, is any less dangerous to democracy than war crimes or acts of torture. In fact, it was the soft crimes of secrecy and deception that enabled the Bush administration's successful campaign to lure our country into war in Iraq -- and so to commit war crimes and acts of torture.
You don't have to be a historian to know that "soft" crimes are what make hard crimes possible. They can also lead to an executive dictatorship and the elimination of our most cherished civil rights and liberties.
Historian and journalist Ruth Rosen, a former columnist for the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle, teaches history and public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and is a senior fellow at the Longview Institute. A newly updated edition of her book, The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Changed America was published in January 2007.
© 2007 Ruth Rosen
38 Comments so far
Show AllDONKEY HOTE & PAUL M. SMITH: May I presume you're both "with me" on the fact that these guys make obscene sums for their "efforts"? I mean if they made minimum wage for pushing papers and manipulating the predicted value of others' labors then certainly there would be no bone to pick with these "geniuses." However, given the recent Hedge Fund debacle, these types of "jobs" should come under scrutiny. Of course in the land that loves money most and makes war in support of this transitory illusion, until "the revolution comes" we can just pray, protest or hold our breath. It IS coming.
When will Nancy Pelosi stand on the steps of Congress and rip up and burn that GD piece of paper, the constitution? That is in effect what they ALL have done over the past several years. Heck! Bush should stand with her and help her! Or more accurately, SHE should help HIM! That's what this bunch of knuckleheads has been doing!
RE: Donkey Hote September 9th, 2007 8:38 pm
"There is a very large contingent in our country that has learned to make a living without producing anything, but as Siouxrose says, I paraphrase, to "skim from the efforts of others.""
Pushing paper around a desk, that represents the labor of others, is not a salable "product", it's just that big 'sucking sound' on the productive system. When 'paper pushing' leads to greater efficiency it is a plus, if not then it is only a drain on overall productivity. There are only so many 'chiefs' needed for so many indians, and too many 'cooks' spoil the broth.
Siouxrose September 8th, 2007 10:49 am
DUTCH 1949: There is no uniform human norm. Some persons are born to feel for others, while others only seek their own personal success. You come from the latter camp because anyone who would study trades shows a willingness to pursue profit not from a true product of their own labor, but on the backs of others. The present worldview which worships Mars (war) and Mammon (profit) and has married these two diabolical archetypes together in such a way as to seduce a great many leads to systems collapse. We see this quite clearly with evidence of global warming; nor is that the only system collapsing.
No person who makes a living from a zero sum game has empathy---- without empathy one is less than fully human. There is a very large contingent in our country that has learned to make a living without producing anything, but as Siouxrose says, I paraphrase, to "skim from the efforts of others." In fact there were a hell of a lot of these folks in the buildings taken down on 9/11. Wonder if there is ANY connection?
Here is a link to the
National Security Archive
archive@GWU.EDU
dutch1949, What was the book you read on trading? More to the point, where were you going with this analogy? And Holland? People talk about politics there as well? Duh. You make no points. Your personal anecdotes are irrelevant. You make simplistic generalizations. The scary part is that you're in charge of people's money.
Dear Medic 6869,
You hit the nail right on the head with what happened to the freedom of information....
I imagined we would be goin through all this shit readin Brave New World and 1984 back at Ohio State.
I guess that means the machine mentally prepared us for our fate....I hope you got some good drugs to get us through this...In fact with good drugs we can't lose!
OK I been thinkin of a name for our revolution.....The word "Party" in the name sucks...so once we agree on that we have a universe of wonderful possibilities and instead of "people" which has been worn out...old hat...sounds like propaganda because of course we are people...they never thought we were aliens did ...will I can't answer that but how about.... ForUS "ForUs" as the name of our new force?
If you want it, you got it... and you can get it if you really want.
Love, Jim
Ruth Rosen wrote an extremely important article which should be read by anybody still interested in the way our country was before the real enemy (the Republican Party and the Democratic Party collaborators) took over in 2000, starting with the Florida voting debacle. The word 'neocon' is meaningless, and progressive liberals should not use it. George Seldes called these type of people 'reactionaries', as whenever any progressive idea was brought forth or enacted into law, the so called 'conservatives' would 'react' vehemently with their standard diatribes.
John Ashcroft fits the description. Along with most appointees of this criminal administration.
'
ezefler: Right on! What ever happened to the 'Peace Dividend'? It went right into the war dividend.
Robert Settgast: Very good point. Public apathy is the greatest threat to a semi-free society, more then the threat of being 'conquered' from without. This is why I say, 'ignorance is not bliss, it is unforgivable'. 'When the vast majority let a small minority do the thinking for them, tyranny sets in'. Citizens in EVERY country have a moral obligation to themselves, their families, and society to be informed enough to prevent political racketeers from taking over.
Rick:: Yes indeed. I think it was 'Eternal Vigilance', but what you said is true. I certainly agree.
Dutch 1949:
Many of us remember you from an earlier post. You seem to like to cause a stir.
Why do you peruse lefty sites? I suggest you also take a look at right wing blogs and compare the venom. Perhaps you could also listen to rightwing radio?
I think you'll find quite a bit of emotion in rightwing blogs. I've found more death threats there than here. Tell them to calm down also, see what happens.
Dutch now lives in a country where smoking weed and prostitution is legal, no wonder he's not angry...
Dutch 1949: I'm glad you have become a good trader through hard work and dedication. But other than that what is your point? That were too uptight? That were screaming into the psychological pillow? This bothers you that were angry? Yes,no doubt there is anger and frustration voiced in these blogs. Thats maybe because we chickens in the hen house are savvy enough to know "ol farmer Bush" is comming with his ax and its only a matter of time.You ask what have we read that might offer other explanations? We have read and watched a lot of what might offer other explanations. Like were giving freedom to the Iraqis,that if we don't fight them over there well be fighting them over here Saddam has weapons of mass destruction,etc,etc, weve heard the lies and many have believed them like so many others do today. When you know the truth you cant be persuaded by lies anymore. What part of loss of freedoms,loss of lives,endless wars,fascism,lack of the most basic of human rights such as the "illegal combatants" face should we not be angry at? If were angry its beacause those that we sent to Washington have betrayed us!! We love this country and hate to see what is happening to it. I guess that makes us a little testy at times. However the anger expounded in these blogs probably doesn't begin to match that of the Iraqis that are pulling their lifeless,limbless children out of the rubble,day after day!!!
I peruse lefty sites and worldwide newspaper sites to attempt to obtain a more objective opinion on not only the American scene, but a more global understanding of current events. When I come to this site, the venomous hatred of Americans in general and Bush in particular is beyond comprehension. Although I might agree with some of your points, I realize most are speaking through negative emotions not givig much thought about what you are saying.
I trade futures for a living, but learning to trade was a long and painfull process. I broke into profitability when I realized it was my mind that was keeping from being a successfull trader. Trading is great metaphor for life. Some of you may understand what I am talking about.
I spent years reading about the markets, and reading about technical indicators. I assumed the more I knew the better the odds of being a good trader - so very very wrong. It was not untill I read an excellent book on trader psychology and applied it's tenets to my way of thought, that I began to be a more consistant trader. Before this, I would be in a losing trade, and watch the screens basically looking at the charts and looking for verification of my position. Eventually the pain of a very large loss was too much and I would exit my position. I would study what went wrong, and lo and behold, those same charts now showed me how I was very obviously wrong. I couldn't see it while in the trade, my emotions blinded me - I was not objective.
If I may be so bold as to suggest, I believe many on this site are looking for anything that will verify what they believe. You will visit sites with other like minded folks. You will read articles and watch films that verify what you already know to be true. Perhaps what you believe is true, but what have you read that might offer other explanations?
We Americans are not that different from other peoples in the world. I have lived in Holland for eight years and I visit often. I get togethor with relatives in my childhood town of Almelo. Sure enough, the same ole political talk filled with emotion. Maybe it's just that talking about the weather is too boring. What do people talk about when gathered togethor? Weather, other people, and politics - what else?
Anyway, have a good day people, and try to calm down.
Dutch
America as forgotten what one of forefathers is quoted as having said " that the price of freedom is constant vigilance".
The American people have become fat,lazy, and complacent!
The lost of freedom and a fall into fascism may be the price we all pay!
DUTCH 1949: There is no uniform human norm. Some persons are born to feel for others, while others only seek their own personal success. You come from the latter camp because anyone who would study trades shows a willingness to pursue profit not from a true product of their own labor, but on the backs of others. The present worldview which worships Mars (war) and Mammon (profit) and has married these two diabolical archetypes together in such a way as to seduce a great many leads to systems collapse. We see this quite clearly with evidence of global warming; nor is that the only system collapsing.
As for hatred of Bush, anyone who is inured to the PAIN of inflicting death, the genetic fate of DU exposure, loss of home/livelihood on hundreds of thousands as if this is some kind of video game or mere pedestrian past time shows a profound lack of empathy for other human beings. What you take for hatred is righteous anger... the same thing that motivated Jesus to turn over the tables of the money changers operating within the synagogue environment.
Some people can live in the inert world of numbers and make trades that bring them income, and others really FEEL the vast losses underway in the names of patriotism or capitalism or some other ism. The net affect is that we are in trouble as a planet, as a humanity. You might want to learn about "Natural Economics" and open your mind to systems analysis based on TRUE costs and benefits.
Don'cha libruls git it? The terrists'll gitcha if we don't keep lotsa big secrets. BOO! And wee need ta bomb lots of anyone we want to blame. I mean my friends need some strategeric big business plannin' breathin' room. I mean, hey, what's on teevee? Nothin' happenin' here...
Maybe this great experiment in democracy or republic or whatever you want to call it simply doesn't work. Maybe there are limits to what checks and balances and division of governmnetal powers and all the othe neat things we were taught or not taught in my case. Maybe when all is said and done Democracy is too fragile. (If one illiterate ranch owner from Texas can warp it so bad) It worked in the beginning because it was a simpler time. No lobbyists,less corruption,smaller government. Maybe what we are seeing I that OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT WAS NEVER MEANT TO HANDLE WHAT IT IS BEING ASKED TO DO.(Like putting a 426 Hemi in a Model T) Then again maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way. Just a thought.
"Blame falls mainly on the apathetic populace who voted for Bush, and then stood by while his team inflected more damage on our republic, and the world, than any administration in our history."
Or any enemy for that matter...
"What Ever Happened to Freedom of Information?"
My take.
In The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt points out that "although tyranny, because it needs no consent, may successfully rule over foreign peoples, it can stay in power only if it destroys first of all the national institutions of its own people."
The military-industrial complex is today an integral part of the U.S. economy. Corporations, financial speculators and energy conglomerates, as well as arms and defense manufacturers profit from war and a militarized economy.
Unilateral, perpetual war abroad, and a loss of democracy and constitutional rights at home, these are aspects of the re-shaping of the American state as it moves to guarantee the interests of global capital and the domination of a rising new class of poor both at home and abroad.
Just have to point this out though it is off topic.
Tonight on Oreilly factor Bill claimed "Iran wants to kill every Jew they can get their hands on." Google Iran Jews population. Guess what? Jews are 11k to 40k of the Iranian population, the second largest population outside Israel in the Middle East. You would think they would be starting at home if Bill was telling the truth.
Whatever happened to freedom to question?
The new Bin Laden videos are being discussed by the MSM, and treat by Bush, as genuine without even asking the obvious: is it genuine?
So it's not merely freedom of information we need to worry about. It's now become freedom to question, its prerequisite. The MSM has forfeited that one long ago.
Why Blame Bush?
The unprecedented atrocities by this arrogant zealot and his henchmen, include stolen elections, disastrous war on our environment through manipulation of science, intimidation of congress with unprecedented character assassinations (ie branding a triple amputee Viet Vet for supporting an inquiry into the causes of 9/11), a grossly misguided war, & the list goes on.
Blame falls mainly on the apathetic populace who voted for Bush, and then stood by while his team inflected more damage on our republic, and the world, than any administration in our history.
HAIL TO THE CHIEF
Our faith in Bush's leadership can be reinforced by his special insight and decisive actions guided by his religious right and financial supporters. He has protected us from the dangerous misinformation developed by the international scientific community, and damaging environmental reforms, by redefining science and the EPA's role in matters concerning global warming, poison air, overpopulation etc.
Realizing the ineptness of the weapons inspectors, when they cited the absence of weapons of mass destruction, he protected us from terrorism by invading Iraq. He recognized the unreliability of the intelligence and diplomatic corps who had predicted turmoil during the following occupation, which he demonstrated in his classic "Mission Accomplished "speech.
For our safety & well being, criticism or censure of this administration cannot be tolerated, and merits reprimand. This is why Bush had to expose Senator Max Cleland, a triple amputee Vietnam veteran, as unpatriotic-- and assassinate his character, for supporting the dangerous inquiry into 9/11.
With such valiant leadership how could anyone be critical?
KIVALS: It's a great compliment that you can give this mystic a nod and accomodate the more esoteric mythology that can be adapted so readily for our times. I mean, if any force outside ourselves is watching this drama, this nonsensical all too painful war from the cosmic sidelines, could they draw any other conclusion? We are so accustomed to linear equations, X & Y = Z, etc that it's quite a cognitive muscular stretch for individuals to recognize that a number of factors play into any central motivation and the events that emanate from it. Thus OIL is part of it, the Republican power consolidation (or more truly, the coalescence into a one party "state"), a despicable set of right wing ideologues having seized absolute power to enact their Project for the New American century, and the usual suspects. Sadly among those, a religious confederacy that sees no disconnect in their quoting Jesus to do everything Jesus would NOT do. And then when viewed from the celestial realm, it all boils down to allegiance to two gods, Mars and Mammon. The believers cannot correct their visioin without transcending their present paradigm, hence, enter: the astrologer. Kivals, I truly do respect your thought process and always look forward to your commentary.
frank1569 September 7th, 2007 3:49 pm
"God, who appointed us, however, has requested that, for the sake of the children, all information past, present and future be available on a need-to-know basis only."
Thanks, Frank. I really do appreciate your sense of humor.
Freedom of information laws went out the door when the corrupt republican dictators moved in.
What Ever Happened to Freedom of Information?
________________________________________________________________
Sorry. I'm not at liberty to say.
I sent in FOIA requests to the CIA, FBI and NSA awhile back concerning myself with specific reference to my activity in activist organizations. Let's see if I ever get anything.
Despite it's evil architecture, you must admire the genius of the master plan. A questionable election followed by a major catastophe and BINGO, you have divided the nation. Abraham Lincoln said "A house divided cannot stand" and he was right. A few news stories and media manipulation and there it is. We lost. We were taken advantage of and we lost big time. The truth hurts but there it is.
Although I'm on the losing side, I don't feel ashamed of my defeat. I was unprepared for the kickoff and I believed as most Americans did that terrorists were attacking my country and we needed to get Bin Laden.
(Fool me once, shame on you)
It almost worked perfectly. The only problem is that some of the people in this country don't believe everything they are told, see, or hear. You can't fool everyone. I am thankful to those people for helping to open my eyes and see what's really going on.
So now what do we do? Looking back in anger is not going to solve anything. Electing Kucinich into the broken system won't work. Violence will not EVER solve anything.
What we need to do now is educate. Once enough people know that they have been lied to and manipulated there will be change. Once enough people understand that they DO have a choice and they CAN make a difference then we will start to win back our country. American's have to WANT their country back. If only some of us do then we'll have the same situation here that we do in Iraq. Freedom cannot be forced it has to be sought.
We are down, but not for the count.
We have nothing to hide. God, who appointed us, however, has requested that, for the sake of the children, all information past, present and future be available on a need-to-know basis only. Please direct all inquires to the higher power whose shoulder we cry upon daily, in between making plans to fill the ol' coffers with that sweet lecture moolah...
"What Ever Happened to Freedom of Information?"
It went out the door with the "Peace Dividend".
Thank you, Ruth, for another clear reminder of how pernicious this administration has been in undermining the democratic principles on which our government is based. I try to make sense of President Bush's constant references to freedom and democracy in his speeches while at the same time destroying the underpinnings of the very institutions and safeguards that comprise our freedom and democracy. One can only conclude that such a person is so intellectually and morally challenged as to be unable to comprehend the contradiction and hypocrisy or is is simply a psychopath, or perhaps both.
The USA has the best government money can buy.If you don't believe this, why do you think ten million is raised to run the man corperatons wnat you to vote for? In America you are free to go hungry free to go without medical free to be homeless free to go without higer education free to go without water free to go without elctrecity and for this you must be ready to kill people in foreign country to make life better for them.They spin the web to have you make them BILLIONS richer.
Siouxrose,
I used to believe that Bush's one true love was the market fairy (who magically turns the market into the answer for all problems), with Jesus of course used for cover to bamboozle the gullible and ill-informed. But now it seems that Bush has been introduced, most likely by Mr. Dick, to Mars, and has fallen head over heels in love with the god of war and the market fairy is playing second fiddle.
What CORP. use the strong arm of the millitary it must keep it do that in secrecy, that is if Cambodia knows we are carpet bombing them, the American people must not be made aware of it.Know this for sure, the USA millitary is the inforcer of keeping foreign countrais from becoming industrail independent.
Right on, Ruth Rosen! In particular, your conclusion to a sound argument, ""soft" crimes are what make hard crimes possible." The pattern of this administration to see itself not only as the embodiment of what the mundane decider decides to constitute law, but also to purport to speak for a higher divinity is spellbinding in its unspeakable arrogance. It reminds me of the kind of guy who is obviously lost, but continues on the same path unwilling to ask for directions. This species of headstrong hubris again brings to mind that one and only persona of martial inanity, MARS, god of war. Mars answers to no one, it's all for and about brute force answering to one ethos, "My way or the high way." THAT's what we got at the wheel, ladies and gentlemen and Mars is not about to let small things like honesty, transparency of government policies, decency, integrity, diplomacy, peace of justice stand in HIS way. The incapacity to see other, to note other points of reference, to HONOR other than self is why MARS is such an "el primitivo" and dangerous archetype, one that should have been sacked about 2200 years ago. The old warriors brought their game into the new millennium by merely attaching JESUS's name as endorsement, thus we have seen scant progress in western evolution since this over-rated archetype took (and maintained through stealth and force) dominion over mass consciousness and all of the behaviors and norms that spring from it. These then become the chain of rules and assumptions TAKEN for reality. What a f--king hoax! And none more deadly.
and all with that smirk. c'mon america, where are ya'?
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) is as good as it gets on most issues. He says what he thinks and fights for what he believes.
The US Government has committed so many crimes that it will take decades to sort out the details. Since the crimes against humanity are obvious to all and the evidence abundant, let us concentrate on efforts that bring justice now to those responsible for these crimes as an example to guide us in the future.
Perhaps had we done this with Nixon and Kissinger for their crimes of September 11th, 1973, we may not have had to go through the awful experience of Bush, Cheney et al.